Proxy War in Ukraine two years later; a relook at our analysis and predictions at the start of the war..

Introduction

The war in Ukraine will always be remembered as a historical event that brought about the formation of a multi-polar world earlier than its inevitability in the future. In other words, The war in Ukraine coined the new era of the world history. This development has been another slap on the face of Kautskyists -Trotskyists of all shades and their open or hidden defense of "ultra-imperialism theory" (which by the way was an earlier theory of Hobson who called it inter-imperialism). They prettified the mono-polar world as a new era of non-antagonistic social development under the dominance of “one country”, “one world party”, “one world leader” etc. With their fantasy and wishes under ultra-imperialism, mono-polar world, they wanted (and still want) “to eliminate "dark" imperialism leaving intact the "sunny" sides of the capitalist order.” (Bukharin) Lenin pointed out that ultra-imperialism is possible but as a temporary one.

Marx said in Capital; “No social formation ever disappears before all the productive forces are developed for which it has room, and new higher relations of production never appear before the material conditions of their existence are matured in the womb of the old society.” Applying the dialectics of Marxism, and considering Lenin’s theory of uneven economic development, (we can say that) every new society in particular (new in the sense of a change in either in its essence or in its form) and in world general, carries within a new form of future society, future intra and international relations.

The war in Ukraine which actually was scripted in 1997 analysis of Rand Corporation and contained the “warnings”, brought about a strong alliance between Russia, China, and North Korea. In other words, extending the military power, economic destruction of Russia, playing Russia against China which was the purpose of the “script “ put on the stage back fired decisively. Russia was able to not only survive the economic pressure but came out of it much stronger and has become the strongest militarily in world scale both in men power and military production capacity. European countries on the other hand, depleted their military arsenals. England, once military superpower, with its 70,000+ man power, has become insignificant militarily along with France and Germany to a serious degree. Poland , nowadays, seems to be the most powerful military power in Europe. Rather than “extending Russia”, the US military which was already extended to 800 military bases in 80 countries, with its interference in Ukraine, Moldova, Poland, Georgia, Taiwan, Myanmar, and now in the Middle east, extended itself to a degree that the US military analysts and ex-military Colonels warns that the US cannot even carry out a winning war against Iran never mind China.

Based on the developments in the world and shattering structural and economic alliances, we had predicted and claimed that Ukraine , even together with NATO has no chances of winning a war against Russia. Neither China nor North Korea (and of course Iran) could not let that happen for that result would become an existential question for all of them. For this concrete reasoning, to speak of a US led Western war against any one of those countries is a fantasy and wishful thinking. Any such direct war will be a war against Russia, China, and North Korea alliance.

Expecting the inevitable formation of this alliance we considered this factor in our assessments of and predictions for the war in Ukraine two years ago.

Ukraine war

Our analysis, evaluations and predictions started on March 2, 2022. We will not revisit the theoretical analysis of the war for they remain to be intact. We will go back to evaluations and predictions most of which have been confirmed by the later events up to date.

It is important to evaluate the assessment and prediction in three phases for each phase has its own character.

Phase of Russian elite’s delusion about the West

Contrary to the perception that Russian elite had the intention to invade Ukraine for their own interests, they were under the illusion that the Western neo-con elites was their “partners” and they could find a peaceful and mutually beneficial agreement with them. The attitude of the Russian elite to the Russian populated regions in Ukraine was that of a compromise.

“Russian bourgeoisie always used the Donbass issue exclusively for their own interests, turned the issue of oppressed people of, Dnieper, Kharkov, Odessa, Nikolaev and specifically of Donbass into a "bargaining chip".

"Pro-Russian" bourgeoisie in Ukraine, in order to protect their own interests tried to saddle the popular movement in the south, southeast Ukraine, through fitting into, becoming part of the Ukronazi consensus, agreeing with the Ukronazi Kyiv authorities, and with the conditions set by them at the expense of the interests of the working people of Donbass. The aims of the people's liberation movement fundamentally contradicted the interests of both bourgeois sections - both of which were trying to suppress this uprising from the very beginning.

“Having strong communist and anti-fascist base, Donbass who had no hopes and illusions for the bourgeois Russian authorities, kept on fighting-despite the persuasion of local "pro-Russian" bourgeoisie not to advocate secession from Ukraine.”

Ukraine for Russian bourgeoisie was a stable market for energy resources and for general consumption goods. Ukraine provided the Russian labor market with cheap, highly skilled labor force. Therefore, the Russian bourgeoisie, no less than the Kyiv bourgeoisie, was interested in preserving the integrity of the state of Ukraine and restoring its borders, against the will of a significant part of the population. In fact, the entire policy of Russian bourgeoisie was aimed precisely at strengthening the Kyiv authorities and increasing trade with it.

That is why, from the very beginning they tried in every possible way to throw off the “burden of responsibility” for Donbass.

That is why, they called on the militias not to hold a referendum on May 11, 2014, in the DPR and LPR, urging them not to secede, but “to establish a direct dialogue between the current Kiev authorities and representatives of the southeast of Ukraine.

That's why, they imposed the “Minsk” on Donbass and obliged them to unconditionally fulfill these agreements, forbidding the servicemen of the people’s militia of Donbass to return fire, under conditions when the Ukronazi side did not stop shelling civilians in Donbass…

However, against all impositions and threats, Donbass people held a referendum at a time they were urged not to hold.” Civil War in Donbass- now and then, and most likely.

So the fact is that it was not the Russian bourgeoisie who was decisive in carrying out the referendum but the people of this region and their struggle against the neo-Nazi regime primarily and Russian Elite on the other. That’s why their struggle was a form of class struggle.

“The liberation movement of Donbass has been waging a struggle, contrary to the interests of bourgeoisies of both. Their liberation struggle was practically being suppressed by both bourgeoisies. Undoubtedly, like most civil wars, struggles contain various groups, including petty bourgeois. However, the crux of the matter is that the contradictions between the interests of labor and capital are expressed here clearly and sharply.

"Civil war”, said Lenin, “is just as much a war as any other. He who accepts the class struggle cannot fail to accept civil wars, which in every class society are natural, and under certain conditions inevitable continuation, development, and intensification of the class struggle. That has been confirmed by every great revolution. To repudiate civil war, or to forget about it, is to fall into extreme opportunism and renounce the socialist revolution." (Military Program of the Proletarian Revolution) " Civil war against the bourgeoisie is also a form of class struggle." (Lenin, Junious Pamphlet)

For Marxist Leninists, civil wars, either anti-fascist or anti-imperialist, are NOT a private matter of that given country but a general matter concerning all anti-fascists and anti-imperialists- in Stalin's words "common cause of the whole of advanced and progressive humanity." Civil War in Donbass- now and then, and most likely.

The delusional phase costed Russian elites dearly before they woke up from it.

Despite the fact that the West was extending NATO towards the East step by step disregarding the agreement made in 1991, despite the fact that the West was not complying with the Minsk agreements, Russian elite, with their delusion, had the expectation that a military move towards Kiew could change their mind. Forcing Kiew to Istanbul agreement seemed they were successful in their tactic. However, with the same illusion, they have disregarded the fact that Kiew was a proxy regime. To show a sign of good will, they even started to withdraw their forces from the invaded regions. It took them a couple days to wake up from that delusion when Kiew carried out their masters’ order and threw Istanbul agreement into garbage bin, started military offensive of its own.

Unlike the western media disinformation with the tactic of big lies, Russian bourgeoisie was still under the illusion that they can extract an “agreement” with a partial invasion.”

“Reaching close proximity of Kiev, Ukronazis agreed to sit at an agreement table and accepted if not all most significant conditions of Russia. They both forgot the decisive role of US-NATO. Russia, as a good will to the agreement started withdrawing from Kiev and other Northern regions. Next day, the visit of US representative made the Ukronazis change their mind and void the agreement with western media presenting the Russian withdrawal as “military victory”, “heroically pushing the invaders from the Ukraine territories”. That was the first blunder of Russian bourgeoisie which changed the entire direction of “Special Military Operation”. Entire focus was given to the “liberation of anti-Euromaidan regions – regions that they were ready to bargain before the war.

Another widely “accepted” bourgeois narrative is the participation of Russian infantry in the war in the fronts of Donbass region. It was the Donbass militia on the ground who fought and still fighting in these regions- of course, without minimizing the importance of logistical, and mechanized support of Russian military. No one really knew the number of Russian military in Ukraine territory, including Donbass. Most objective military analyzers agree that it was in the range of 80,000 in entire Ukraine. The limited character of “SMO” or consciously, the air force of Russia was not to be seen in these regions.

The shift in Russian bourgeois' policy with the SMO, did not change the character of the struggle of Donbass people. Their struggle against the Ukronazis primarily and Russian bourgeoisie secondarily remained the same. It only coincided their interests as far as the Ukraine neo-Nazi bourgeois state is concerned.”

” Will the Referendum end the “Special Military Operations”? - from its limitations to limitless “defense” operations.

Second Phase – Collapse of the delusion about West – New Strategy

This development was the first “poking” for the wake up call. However, the confession of ex-Chancellor Angela Merkel and its’ confirmation by France’s former president, Francois Hollande has woken them up.

“The 2014 Minsk Agreement was an attempt to buy time for Ukraine. Ukraine used this time to become stronger, as you can see today. Ukraine in 2014-2015 and Ukraine today are not the same.”… “it was clear for everyone” that the conflict was suspended and the problem was not resolved, “but it was exactly what gave Ukraine the priceless time.” A. Merkel

"Yes, Angela Merkel is right on this point.. "Since 2014, Ukraine has strengthened its military posture. Indeed, the Ukrainian army was completely different from that of 2014. It was better trained and equipped. It is the merit of the Minsk agreements to have given the Ukrainian army this opportunity." Francois Hollande

In reality, Russian elite did not need these concrete events to wake up from delusion. Like everyone else, they could have read the RAND Corporation’s 1997 report titled “Extending Russia: Competing from Advantageous Ground” which has been a script to put on the stage not only for Russia but for many other countries. They may have read it but due to their delusion, they may not have acted upon it.

Another significant, actually decisive confession came from the Russian elite, especially from Putin in the form of self criticism. Putin numerous times repeated the fact that he was under the illusion about the west and their intentions. In his last interview he repeated this by saying; we were fooled”.

This wake up call reinforced with the military support of the West to Ukraine. Russians (we believe with the advisory contribution of China) formulated a strategy while slowing down and even retrieving from many regions to prepare itself in order to carry out its strategy.

Military Strategy.

Russia has come up with a strategy that actually has shown the world that the traditional “shock and awe” U.S war tactics, or the 2^nd WW tactics are antiquated, a new type of war, a technological combined, coordinated war tactics are the tactics of new era. It was a strategy of dragging the war and using the tactics of attrition.

“As we have noted in our earlier articles, Russian strategy is not a short-term military strategy but a political strategy which has long term goals of expanding its “sphere of influence” and preventing the existence of NATO not only on its border but as far as possible, to the status of 1990s. That does require the dragging of this war all through the winter, invasion of all Russian speaking regions and even cities and towns, and integrating them into Russian territory either with autonomous status or not.

“The policy of dragging the war for both sides is in line with their interests for the ongoing sphere of influence conflict. That is why the war will go on in different intensity until either the destruction of Ukraine or a government change with a position of neutrality.” War in Ukraine; Now what? The prospects of the second phase and on?

“Ukraine’s offensives in small and larger scales have been purely political, rather than sustainable. And strangely enough, offences coincided with the “statements of multi-billion-dollar military aids” from US and other western countries- either before or after the approval of billion dollar “aids”. In other words, none of the offensives had a long-term military significance so far, but “headline” significance to boost the morale…..War is not waged for headlines, but for sustainable offensive victory…Russian strategy and tactics are based on a long-term sustainability and sphere of influence rather than short term, “headline” tactics.” Ukraine Military- A Guinea pig of US-NATO experiment in studying Russian Military tactics

Political Strategy

Combined with the military strategy, Russian political strategy aimed at minimal civilian losses. One reason for this may be that they see the Ukrainians as brothers or one of their own, or it may be another tactic.

Domestic tactic;

“The contradiction within the enemy camp has to be utilized " to weaken the enemy and to strengthen its own reserves". Of course, the Russian bourgeoisie has the same idea in "utilizing". That's why the front fighters on the ground in Donbass are local militias as it is in Kharkiv. Russian bourgeoisie is taking it slow with the consideration of not alienating the local population and giving ample time to Kiev neo-Nazis to sit at a negotiation table. At the same time, considering the population and progressive ideological make up of Dnieper, Nikolayev, Odessa they are preparing themselves and the locals to further advance to these regions in order to force Ukraine bourgeoisie to an agreement much heavier than the one that they agreed in Istanbul, but did not comply with- despite the withdrawal of Russian army from Kyiv and Chernihiv regions. “ Civil War in Donbass- now and then, and most likely.

Externally directed tactic;

“Long term Russian strategy is not limited to military and political aspects. Despite all the “big lie” bombardment of Western Media, people will notice the frustrated, aggressive, uncalculated actions of Ukraine and US, while Russia is making itself looking like a “patient country “that acts only as a response to aggressive acts. Contrary to western media narratives all of which coming to the light as false and exaggeration, Russia is very careful in presenting itself as “reasonable” in practice. It is playing for the hearts and minds of the world population.” War in Ukraine; Now what? The prospects of the second phase and on?

The shift in the world governments and population attitude to Russia has dramatically changed. Especially with the genocidal Gaza bombing and UN votes on the issue left he US alone with British against almost all the countries of the world.

The statistical comparison of civilian casualties in Gaza for 25 days 24,000, versus 563 days in Ukraine, 17,535, is a striking example of how Russian strategy and tactics worked for them. (lets keep in mind that most civilian casualties in Ukraine is due to Ukraine’s bombardment of civilian cities in Donbass, and from their own anti-air missiles within Ukraine)

Contrary to the Western Claims and narratives, the second phase is not a “stale mate” but a phase of gradual and incremental progress of Russian military. Some analysts call it “aggressive attrition” tactics of Russia with which I agree. They call it stale mate, but Russia defeated Ukraine in Bakhmut (Marinka and now in Avdiivka) during this phase. They are progressing at almost at each front with cat and mouse, encirclement tactics at unexpected places.

Third Phase- expected and possibilities

It is clear that that Russia will continue to its “aggressive attrition” tactics to a point no one can guess. Its military power amounted over a million men. We have noted that;

The longer the war is, the larger the Ukraine loss of territories will be- but most likely limited to the regions mentioned.” Briefly- From secession to accession and its implications

However, we stated that;

It does not mean that the “invasion of Ukraine at large” is impossible or cannot be on the agenda. The conditions may change drastically with the participation of other bordering countries and may require the extension of invasion to other regions. This possibility may be deducted from Putin’s speech using “past” tense in regard to Russian purpose and intentions in Ukraine and not responding to the question of “will Ukraine be able to exist as a state”, he responds in past tense “we did not set ourselves to destroy Ukraine”. That can be translated to; “if it requires, we will have to”. The difference between Marxist and Bourgeois analysis of the developments and forecast of the war in Ukraine

Further clarifying we noted;

Although it is unlikely for Russia to Invade all Ukraine, at the same time “it is unlikely that Russia will stop after the total capture of Donbass, Kherson. As the comrades from Donbass noted long ago, it possibly will extend all the way to Odessa while connecting Transnistria, cutting Ukraine from the Black Sea, and most likely will capture Kharkov in the process to strike a huge blow and prevent further attacks to Donbass (and Russia) from that region.” Will the Referendum end the “Special Military Operations”?

Due to the Western, especially that of US pressure not to sit for an agreement, it is most likely that Kharkiv (which already made an official agreement with Donbass), Dnieper and Nikolayev is on the agenda and will be "liberated" in the process. Depending on the developments during this phase, Odessa is a likely choice to cut Ukraine from accessing to Black Sea. All of which has the expectation of an internal conflict within Ukraine bourgeoisie and the removal of "Euromaidan", "US-NATO" bourgeois clique from power by the Ukrainians themselves. “ Civil War in Donbass- now and then, and most likely.

Latest developments and inner fighting within the Ukraine regime, dissatisfaction and unrest within the population should not be overlooked. They have been deceiving Ukrainian population (and world) with “military aid” packages and false hopes.

It is important to remind that regions with Russian population, Anti-Fascist and Communists have always had their underground organizations. It was stated;

Those who are familiar with Ukraine's past (1917) and recent history (after 2014) may know that Nikolaev alongside with Dnieper, Odessa, Kharkov, and Donbass, historically had a strong anti-fascist base and after 2014 went underground. That is why I wouldn't doubt the correctness of this news. It is important to understand the fact that there are anti-fascists especially in these oblasts, same as there are fascist remains in Kherson, and Zap Oblasts.

According to the news report of RIA Novosti on October 25, a member of the anti-fascist underground organization states that "the underground organization of Nikolaev received weapons from their supporters in the Armed Forces of Ukraine".

(That may be taken as an indication of the existence of forced-recruited anti-fascist soldiers within the military members of this Oblast)

We had noted in our July article that Russians " ... considering the population and progressive ideological make up of Dnieper, Nikolayev, Odessa they are preparing themselves and the locals to further advance to these regions...it is most likely that Kharkiv, Dnieper and Nikolayev are on the agenda and will be "liberated" in the process. Depending on the developments during this phase, Odessa is a likely choice to cut Ukraine from accessing to Black Sea."

It is possible that we may hear more about the underground activities in the coming days -especially after the start of expected offensive of Russian military to these regions.

An important undeniable fact is that Russia has been avoiding bombing the regions with Russian populations and using the encirclement military tactic with which forcing the encircled to withdraw or surrender. Now the question follows " how will they act once these regions are captured and the war is escalated"? Will they be that selective in destruction if and when other bordering countries and NATO are involved? One's own existence always supersedes the existence of others. This possibility may be another reason why Russia is keeping its large military men-power and air-force intact.

In that sense, under current conditions it is impossible to forecast even if there will be a Ukraine left as we know it. Depending on the developments, there may not even left a country called Ukraine. Its western regions may be incorporated by the surrounding countries that have claims on it with their population.

Military Aids to Ukraine

Actual military aids to Ukraine depleted the military stocks of the West. The US and Europe emptied their antiquated military machine and ammunition stocks at the expense of taxpayers. Latest “aid” packages for the last year on have been “financial”. That is recycling of money in the form of bribes and transfer of money to military industry for weapons to be produced. Listening to the military experts, not only the capacity of production to cover the needs of Ukraine is unavailable in any country, most of the production will take if not months but years to reach Ukraine. Considering the objective realities of the war in Ukraine, it does not look like that Ukraine has months never mind years to survive this war. Russia, however, has the capacity to produce more than entire West is combined. That’s why I had noted that;

“I do not have to dwell on the “Military aids” from the west, any intelligent person would know that no amount of “help” from the West can be decisive in this war. After all, no country has unlimited stack of military equipment and supply to donate to other. Aside from the fact that most countries, including US depleted its stock for Ukraine, now they are dipping in the “absolute” weapons that are short in supply (ammunitions etc.) and will have no decisive affect against Russian military equipment especially against the air superiority- which even the US Military analysts grade as “have no equal in the world. Any new military equipment and ammunition need to be produced which takes months if not years. Any specialized equipment requires knowledge, expertise and training taking months, that is if it is not destroyed by Russia by the time they are trained.” War in Ukraine; Now what? The prospects of the second phase and on?

Conclusion

The war that was forced upon Russia by the West brought about a counter affect which not only economically but militarily devastated the West while making Russia economically stronger and militarily most experienced and strongest army in the world. Contrary to the purpose of “script” to extend Russia and play it against China, they extended themselves and helped the creation of a stronger Russia China alliance. Considering the fact that North Korea has extensive border with Russia and China, the alliance extended to North Korea. Neither China nor Russia would permit a buffer country like North Korea to fall in to the hands of the West for obvious reasons proven via Ukraine.

The Ukrainian Defense Minister, Oleksii Reznikov’s confession that Kyiv is fighting against Russia to fulfill NATO's mission has been another warning sign not to let proxies at the border..

"We are carrying out NATO’s mission today. They aren’t shedding their blood. We’re shedding ours."

As we have noted;

The analysis of Marxist Leninists seems contradictory at first due to the application of the dialectic of Marxism to a given current situation but always confirms to be correct with each development. The underlying reason is not to rely on the “military aspect”, “military tactics”, “military gains and losses” but to the core of the reasons for war – that is political and economic aims of a war combined.

Military tactics are applied as only a part of the short or long term economic-political aims. And these tactics are never isolated from the tactics of other belligerent countries (US-NATO) since that too are related to their political and economic interests. Concentrating on the “military tactics” on the particular cannot respond to the larger political-economic war going on in world scale. On the contrary, the war in Ukraine – Europe specific, and world at large can respond the nature of military tactics being used in Ukraine.

Policies are economically driven which in return are dialectically connected to the forming of strategic alliances with the countries that have significant value in their economic, geographical, and military conditions.” War in Ukraine; Now what? The prospects of the second phase and on?

Although we will be posting a synopsis of the discussion on the “possibility of nuclear war”, we should quote a paragraph in that subject

“People talk about “nuclear war". That is a real threat for sure, and it is possible, but highly unlikely for various reasons. One of the miscalculations is that when people talk about a nuclear war, they only consider US versus Russia. One cannot speak of a nuclear war against Russia without considering China and North Korea on its side, for their very existence is dependent on the existence of Russia in such situation. In other words, that war would be a war between US-NATO and China-Russia- North Korea (possibly Iran). In that kind of line up, no one, including the US, can benefit from such a war. They will continue proxy, regional wars to weaken economically (even their allies, like US is doing to Europe) or to strengthen their allies economically (like China is doing-what US did after 2nd WW) in order to get an upper hand in the sphere of influence through the strategic alliances.” War in Ukraine; Now what? The prospects of the second phase and on?

It is inevitable that imperialism, especially the ones that rely heavily on military industry, will remain reactionary and continue to be a source of aggression and aggressive wars. If this is a declining imperialist one, aggression and wars -either proxy or direct- will be inevitable. Unlike the Kautskyists claim, they will only shake hands against any rising people's revolutions, but they will continue fighting against each other till one side is forced to compromise. The period of "peace" following this compromise does not end the possibility of war but gives each other time to prepare for a new war, or proxy wars.

Wars are not inevitability in human social development, they are a socio-historical phenomenon- currently a phenomenon of capitalism. A time will come when wars will have been done away with once and for all- that is, when socialism overcomes capitalism. But till then, in class society, under the conditions of capitalism, war will remain to be a means of resolving the antagonistic contradictions of social development on one side, and contradictions between the capitalists on the other. Permanent Peace unfortunately is an illusion under capitalism, it only serves conflicting sides to prepare for the next.

MLDG

Erdogan A

February 23, 2024

Thailand

Related Articles

What is annexation? Referendum in Donbass and other regions

Civil War in Donbass- now and then, and most likely.

Sophistry of Ukraine’s right to self-determination- stripping Marxism Leninism from its revolutionary spirit and siding with bourgeoisie.

Russian silence; an indication of valid arrogance or its strategy?

Briefly- From secession to accession and its implications

Will the Referendum end the “Special Military Operations”? - from its limitations to limitless “defense” operations.

Ukraine Military- A Guinea pig of US-NATO experiment in studying Russian Military tactics